Comments on: Debate notes http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=debate-notes Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Jeff Foust http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1594 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 23:25:08 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1594 Given the decline in the quality of this discussion, I am closing comments for this post.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1593 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 22:14:33 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1593 oler likes to post after he’s had a few sips – for courage

]]> By: Robert G. Oler http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1592 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 15:29:00 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1592 Posted by at October 17, 2004 09:37 AM

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1591 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 14:37:32 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1591 oler lives in a fantasy world – you can safely ignore whatever he writes

]]> By: Robert G. Oler http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1590 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 05:02:43 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1590 Posted by Derek L. at October 16, 2004 11:45 PM

]]> By: Derek L. http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1589 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:45:53 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1589 IE more of the same, circling the globe endlessly as we’ve done since 1981.

That’s only a problem to people who confuse Buck Rodgers stunts with science and exploration.

As for the lunar program. Had Jack Kennedy got a second term by the time it was over Jan 20, 1969 well the lunar landing was less then 6 months away. The heavy lifting had been done and Kennedy would have been Potus when 8 went around the Moon.

That makes the strong and unfounded assumption that Apollo recieved any significant support from Kennedy. Before his death he was already backing away from it. After his death it recieved a groundswell of support as his monument.

]]> By: Robert G. Oler http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1588 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:16:27 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1588 Posted by Dogsbd at October 16, 2004 10:00 PM

]]> By: Robert G. Oler http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1587 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:11:31 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1587 Posted by Dogsbd at October 16, 2004 10:42 PM

]]> By: Robert G. Oler http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1586 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:09:07 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1586 Posted by Dogsbd at October 16, 2004 10:00 PM

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.spacepolitics.com/2004/10/14/debate-notes/#comment-1585 Sun, 17 Oct 2004 03:59:35 +0000 http://www.districtofbaseball.com/spacepolitics/?p=319#comment-1585 “In the past 20 years nothing in the manned space realm has moved from ‘idea’ to contracts in 10 months.”

This statement is a bit misleading. First of all, the CEV is still in the conceptual stage: any contracts to be awarded soon will cover design work; no hardware will be built for at least a couple of years. Second, much of the CEV work carried over, in practice, from the OSP program that dates back to late 2002.
And let’s not forget that there’s no guarantee that Congress will fund the CEV in 2005…

]]>